This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

Originally Posted by Deuce

Yes, I've always thought a nationwide decision was very unlikely in this case. The judges seem skittish to get too far out in front of this issue. I suspect their decision will be limited to California.

On the other hand, we've seen a cascade of states and even other nations making decisions on this very recently. SCOTUS might see the and just go "well, public support is rapidly changing so lets not worry about going too fast."

I guess the politics of SSM vary so much from state to state (Prop 8) that a sweeping decision wouldn't suit them. According to this article the issue has almost moved too fast in support for its proponents own good.

They didn't want a repeat of the abortion issue. With its landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, the high court stepped in and guaranteed a right to abortion but also triggered a backlash that has lasted for 40 years.

With same-sex marriage, by contrast, legislators and voters in nearly every state had the chance to make their feelings known before the Supreme Court weighs in.

"People forget that durable rights don't come from courts, they come from consensus and strong support from society," says Jonathan Rauch, author of Denial, a recent memoir about growing up gay. "We are winning the right to marriage in a bigger, deeper way by winning it in the court of public opinion."

Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

I guess the politics of SSM vary so much from state to state (Prop 8) that a sweeping decision wouldn't suit them. According to this article the issue has almost moved too fast in support for its proponents own good.

The comparison between same sex marriage and abortion (RvW) has always been wrong. It is much closer to Loving than it ever could be to RvW because people's view on abortion has been about the same for a long time, around half for and half against, and there is two potential conflicts in rights here, mother's versus unborn child's. Same sex marriage however has been shown to be set on a straight line of increasing support that only continues to increase and, given the current younger generation support of same sex marriage, is only going to continue to increase with time (the younger generation does not support abortion in such greater numbers, if at all, than the older generation). With the Loving decision, over 70% of the country was against legalizing same sex marriage, particularly through a SCOTUS decision. Yet, it happened and the issue was basically resolved.

"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

Originally Posted by roguenuke

The comparison between same sex marriage and abortion (RvW) has always been wrong. It is much closer to Loving than it ever could be to RvW because people's view on abortion has been about the same for a long time, around half for and half against, and there is two potential conflicts in rights here, mother's versus unborn child's. Same sex marriage however has been shown to be set on a straight line of increasing support that only continues to increase and, given the current younger generation support of same sex marriage, is only going to continue to increase with time (the younger generation does not support abortion in such greater numbers, if at all, than the older generation). With the Loving decision, over 70% of the country was against legalizing same sex marriage, particularly through a SCOTUS decision. Yet, it happened and the issue was basically resolved.

Maybe, but the trajectory of support for gay marriage is a very recent phenomenem.

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

So was the support for interracial marriage at the time of Loving. In fact, there was less national support for interracial marriage than there currently is for same sex marriage.

I have no idea what the data from that period is. There is a significant difference, however, between Loving and the current cases, and that is that racial discrimination was the specific target and raison d'etre of the Fourteenth Amendment.

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

Originally Posted by roguenuke

The comparison between same sex marriage and abortion (RvW) has always been wrong. It is much closer to Loving than it ever could be to RvW because people's view on abortion has been about the same for a long time, around half for and half against, and there is two potential conflicts in rights here, mother's versus unborn child's. Same sex marriage however has been shown to be set on a straight line of increasing support that only continues to increase and, given the current younger generation support of same sex marriage, is only going to continue to increase with time (the younger generation does not support abortion in such greater numbers, if at all, than the older generation). With the Loving decision, over 70% of the country was against legalizing same sex marriage, particularly through a SCOTUS decision. Yet, it happened and the issue was basically resolved.

I think you mean 70% against interracial marriage. Well, it's very different from abortion, which you'd still have the nuts attacking clinics if it were a state by state deal. The rhetoric hasn't changed at all since even before Roe v Wade. SSM has near 80% approval by the under 30 crowd. That's not going to lower much if any just because SCOTUS issues a sweeping verdict, much as interracial marriage support has only gone up. Either way, this is going to be a complete non issue very soon, which is why I think there is some chance the court ends this disgrace.

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

Originally Posted by chromium

I think you mean 70% against interracial marriage. Well, it's very different from abortion, which you'd still have the nuts attacking clinics if it were a state by state deal. The rhetoric hasn't changed at all since even before Roe v Wade. SSM has near 80% approval by the under 30 crowd. That's not going to lower much if any just because SCOTUS issues a sweeping verdict. Either way, this is going to be a complete non issue very soon, which is why I think there is some chance the court ends this disgrace.

If you're right you should hope and pray the court punts and allows the change to take place via democratic process.

re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

Originally Posted by Helix

no.

this is about gay people having the same right to marry as heterosexuals currently have. while i really don't care if someone marries multiple people, it isn't the same equal protection issue, nor is it analogous for reasons which i've already explained.

Gays have the same right to marry the opposit sex as heteros do. Heteros do not have any right to marry the same sex. Equil protection is already achieved.